• Welcome to the new Community Forums at HiveWire 3D! Please note that for security purposes our store and forum are on two separate servers so you will require a separate login for each. The store will ask you for your Real Name (WILL NOT BE displayed to the public) and the forum will ask you for a User Name (WILL BE displayed to the public). You may use the same email address and password for both.
  • We are having some issues with our customized styles. The forum will be open with the default style until we can correct the issues. Thank you for your patience.
  • Welcome, Guest! The results are in for the "Spin to Win" Render Challenge! Come check out the final gallery!

HiveWire Warthog from Harry

Pendraia

Seasoned
Contributing Artist
I think the problem with the original Genesis was that many vendors didn't like it being androgynous and there was a lot of talk about it being difficult to develop for. I found that surprising as Genesis was the first figure I found easy to develop for and made a number of things for Genesis. Many of which I never got around to releasing.

However once Genesis 2 was split into the two sexes there were a number of vendors who came on board that previously hadn't been willing to. Genesis 3 has seen more vendors coming over to making for the daz figures again but I'm not sure if that's due to the figures or Iray. There are a lot of people who've posted how they like Iray.

I think that there are a number of variables as to why people develop now for DS when they used to develop for Poser. I don't believe that it is one specific thing.
 

Sparky

Monster Maker
Contributing Artist
Funny enough, Dual Quaternion is actually a step down from the Tri-Ax weight mapping, since you don't have a separate weight for each axis of rotation. So yes, 2/3 the work of setting up Tri-Ax weights, but more JCMs. I think they may have gone over to a more industry-standard way of doing things for easier inter-compatibility with other programs like Unity and Maya, possibly as part of their work on Morph3D.
 

Pendraia

Seasoned
Contributing Artist
Hey Sparky, you're the second person I've seen saying that it's a step down. I agree with what you are saying about moving towards a more industry standard way of doing things so they can sell to the Unity market. It would be interested to know how much business they get through it.

I think the latest figure has been set up for it and that's why they changed the pose otherwise the base figure is pretty much the same shape as Genesis 3 when I loaded them up together with very little difference.
 

JOdel

Extraordinary
HW Honey Bear
Yeah, one keeps being told that developers didn't like the androgyny. But I'm inclined to think that the androgyny was simply the last straw. I'd be more likely to suspect that it was the incompatible weight-mapping system which really stuck in people's craw. They'd already hit the wall of needing to adopt a weight-mapped system into their workflow to support current versions of Poser, another one was one too many. Particularly another proprietary one. Dual quaternion is at least not proprietary.

And, waiting it out appears to have been a sound strategy. DAZ has a history of burning its bridges and jumping into new/other frying pans. Also of hitching up with other people's proprietary systems. They haven't dropped Optitex yet, even though I (Note, I'm a complete outsider and really know nothing) am inclined to doubt that that partnership has been paying the dividends anticipated. Now they've hitched their wagon to NVIDEA's tech. Which is paying off so far, but we'll see how that is paying out in another 4-6 years.
 

Pendraia

Seasoned
Contributing Artist
Have to agree Jodel...if an inexperienced developer(me) can do female clothing for it then surely more experienced vendors would find it easy also. I think there were many variables.
 

Sparky

Monster Maker
Contributing Artist
As a developer, the androgyny of Genesis was the feature I liked best, so naturally, it was the feature that was immediately abandoned. I never once understood any of the arguments against it. Some of the customers might have been over-eager to have all the products work perfectly across all possible shapes, but that was just a matter of expectation management which could easily have been handled better than "quick, let's split the genders again!" I notice they don't do separate children anymore, though, even though it's much more difficult to set up a child shape on an adult figure than a male shape on a female figure and vice-versa. The whole "it's easier to make gender-specific content on gender-specific bases" is all just pure bull.
 

Pendraia

Seasoned
Contributing Artist
I agree Sparky...I'm wondering though whether we should move these posts to a new thread so we don't take the warthog thread off topic. What does everyone think?
 

JOdel

Extraordinary
HW Honey Bear
Yeah, probably a sound move. Although I don't generally get much in the way of notification for the development threads, which would seem the most likely destination.
 
Top